ETFIQ
RankingsCompareHoldingsFlowsResearch
Ask ETFIQETF ModelsMy portfolioWeekly note
A
vs
B
Share on XDownload as PDFCompare their flowsAsk about these two funds

CMDT vs PDBC: how they differ

CMDT and PDBC hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and PDBC returned +51.9% over the year. PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund and Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF.

PDBC costs 0.06 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 20.3 points; PDBC is 10.5 times larger.

CMDTPDBC
Expense ratio0.65%0.59%
Net assets, CMDT as of Jun 30, 2026 and PDBC as of Oct 8, 2026$751m$7.9bn
Total return, 1 year+31.6%+51.9%
Holdings in common0%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 8, 2026.

+31.6%
CMDT total return, 1 year
+51.9%
PDBC total return, 1 year
0.65%
CMDT expense ratio
0.59%
PDBC expense ratio

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CMDT and PDBC hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 8, 2026.

half

0% in common

Positions both hold, largest shared weight first
Holding CMDT PDBC
Only in CMDT
PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active Exchange-Traded Fund 5.91%
ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS IN 1.45%
LETRA TESOURO NACIONAL 1.43%
BANK OF MONTREAL 1.37%
TRANSCANADA PIPELINES 1.15%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 1.03%
Fannie Mae 0.94%
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY 0.94%
Only in PDBC
POWERSHARES CAYMAN FUND 18.02%

On the same fields

CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
PDBC
Invesco Optimum Yield Diversified Commodity Strategy No K-1 ETF
Where it sits Commodity ETF Commodity ETF
Issuer PIMCO Invesco
What it is Actively managed Actively managed
Total return, 1 year +31.6% +51.9%
S&P 500 over the same days +17.3% +17.3%
Gap to the S&P 500 +14.4 pts +34.6 pts
Expense ratio 0.65% 0.59%
Holdings 259 1
Net assets, CMDT as of Jun 30, 2026 and PDBC as of Oct 8, 2026 $751m $7.9bn

CMDT and PDBC on the fields both publish, as of Oct 9, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

CMDT in plain words

CMDT is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.65% a year.

Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +31.6% with distributions reinvested, against +40.2% for its benchmark, the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return.

PDBC in plain words

PDBC is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 9, 2026 it returned +51.9% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% a year.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CMDT or PDBC?
In the year to Oct 9, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CMDT returned +31.6% and PDBC +51.9%.
Which is cheaper, CMDT or PDBC?
PDBC is cheaper, by 0.06 percentage points a year. On $10,000 held for a year that difference is about $6. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
CMDT vs NBCMCMDT vs HGERBCI vs CMDTCMDT vs FTGCCMDY vs PDBCPDBC vs SDCIGSG vs PDBCNBCM vs PDBC
CMDT on its own →PDBC on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →Standards and sources →
Where these figures came from
CMDT filings on SEC EDGAR ↗CMDT prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗PIMCO website ↗PDBC filings on SEC EDGAR ↗PDBC prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Invesco page for PDBC ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, CMDT against PDBC, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cmdt-vs-pdbc

Open data

Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.